| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: refactoring - share str2*int64 functions |
| Date: | 2019-07-16 12:39:43 |
| Message-ID: | 3F246623-16FC-462A-BDE5-9874FA0EED5A@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Jul 16, 2019, at 3:30 AM, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:
>> Cool. I'm not exactly sure when we should include 'pg_' in identifier
>> names. It seems to be used for functions/macros that wrap or replace
>> something else with a similar name, like pg_pwrite(),
>> pg_attribute_noreturn(), ... In this case it's just our own code that
>> we're moving, so I'm wondering if we should just call it scanint8().
>
> I added the pg_ prefix as a poor man's namespace because the function can be used by external tools (eg contribs), so as to avoid potential name conflicts.
Yeah, I think if we are going to expose it to front end code there is a good argument for some kind of prefix that makes it sound PostgreSQL-related.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2019-07-16 12:50:49 | Re: [HACKERS] proposal: schema variables |
| Previous Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2019-07-16 12:03:16 | Re: Add parallelism and glibc dependent only options to reindexdb |